Ángela Vivanco’s defense lawyer assured that the process of removing the magistrate “is a renunciation of the jurisprudence of the plenary session of the Supreme Court.”
Without the presence of Minister Ángela Vivanco The defense of his defense began this morning to avoid his removal from the country’s highest court.
As planned, at 9:00 a.m. the plenary session of the Supreme Court began for the hearing to remove the suspended minister from the highest court.
On the occasion, the Supreme Court rapporteur, Iara Barrios detailed the seven points for which the Supreme Court opened the judge’s removal notebook.
Subsequently, the rapporteur confirmed that according to the confidential letter delivered by the Public Ministry, What was reported by Ciper was corroborated and that began the process to remove her from the country’s highest court..
Next, Iara Barrios mentioned the main points addressed by Ángela Vivanco’s defense in the 222-page response which he presented to the court.
The arguments of Ángela Vivanco’s defense
Subsequently, the lawyer in charge of the defense of Ángela Vivanco, Cristóbal Osorio, took the floor, saying that “Let’s see if the strict law and the file can lead to a removal or if it is necessary to initiate a disciplinary procedure, because there is no proof today“.
He then presented the arguments and stated that the first of them refers to the fact that “the removal process It is a renunciation of the jurisprudence of the plenary session of the Supreme Court“.
He then asserted that his client’s case and that of the Rancagua Court of Appeals in 2018 are similar and at that time The highest court decided to carry out a disciplinary investigationwhich must be completed before starting a removal process.
Lawyer Osorio then stated that “there is no evidence” for the removal of Vivanco, and stated that the tests are “illegal, since Access to the data was achieved through the violation of databases in the possession of the Public Ministry“.
“The evidence sent by the national prosecutor is not authentic and lacks integrity“, then stated Ángela Vivanco’s defender, who asserted that the national prosecutor, Ángel Valencia, did not send all the chats between his client and Hermosilla, but only a “collage.”
He also questioned the presence of “witnesses with and without faces” to whom Ángela Vivanco’s defense could not cross-examine
The plenary session then decided to go into recess for a few minutes.
The defense’s defense
After resuming the session, Lawyer Osorio addressed each of the charges against Ángela Vivanco and proceeded to refute them according to the defense’s perspective.
The professional stated that “the charges either do not meet the standard of due precision or are prescribed“, and assured that they also “lack coherence.”
He then stated that in the first charge, that of interfering in the appointment of the national prosecutor and the appointments of real estate conservator of Viña del Mar and Concón, Osorio recalled that the questioned meeting between his client and Carlos Palma It occurred within the framework of an activity that was reported on the website of the Judiciary.
He also assured that There is no evidence that Minister Vivanco has taken part in these activitiesand the charge refers to the fact that it was she and not her partner, Gonzalo Miqueles, who would have carried out the arrangements.
“Believe that The minister of Vivanco is a caregiver for her partner, it is a stereotype that cannot be accepted in this most excellent plenary session,” said Cristóban Osorio.
After the presentation of lawyer Osorio, The plenary session of the country’s highest court prepared to deliberate on the caseafter which he will announce his resolution on the future of Minister Vivanco.
The charges against Minister Vivanco
Specifically, the removal notebook against Ángela Vivanco for the following issues:
1.- Interference in the last procedure appointment of the position of national prosecutor and in the appointments of real estate conservator of Viña del Mar and Concón.
2.- Irregularities committed in the processing and knowledge of the cause of Belaz Movitec Spa consortium with Codelco.
3.- Intervention in appointment of ministers of courts in coordination with lawyer Luis Hermosilla Osorio.
4.– Interference in pending cases and in the integration of chambers of the Supreme Court with the lawyer Luis Hermosilla Osorio.
5.- Delivery of information about causes related to members of the Carabineros of Chile and the Armed Forces of knowledge of the Third Chamber of this court before the signing of the sentence and its notification, and make procedural recommendations to the aforementioned lawyer.
6.- Agreement with the already referred lawyer to obtain the appointment of members of this court related to their interests.
7.- Irregularities committed in the processing of cases 251,511-2023, 76,398-2020, 99,086-2022, 105,065-2023, 242,258-2023, 6,632-2024, 17,536-2019 and 33,342- 2019, by non-compliance with standards and criteria existing in this regard.